5 ms·

Superconductors are in the name. They're ideal conductors. As a corollary, superconductors coiled into a wire, shaped like an inductor, are also ideal inducto

by retrac 3y ago

Superconductors are in the name. They're ideal conductors. As a corollary, superconductors coiled into a wire, shaped like an inductor, are also ideal inductors. By ideal, I informally mean nearly perfect in a mathematical sense. A thin superconductor can carry an almost arbitrary amount of electricity with 0% loss. This is a real-world application already for superconductors, but it requires cooling the entire conductor to liquid helium temperature. (It's not truly limitless - enough current will eventually break down the superconducting effect - but ten billion watts down a 1 mm thick wire is doable.) Similarly, an inductor made out of a superconductor, that is looped back on itself, can hold a magnetic field indefinitely, with 0% loss. Energy storage. Also, novel ways of manipulating magnetic fields, and as a consequence of that, novel ways of manipulating radiation that interacts with magnetic fields. Really, anything that needs a strong magnetic field could benefit. Maglev trains. Portable MRI scanners would exist today, if the electromagnet didn't need to be submerged in liquid helium. Superconducting computer circuits would dissipate no heat other than for the work required to physically change the state of the transistors. Power consumption could decrease by several orders of magnitude. Though to be honest, one day printing room-temperature superconductors lithographically is a rather unlikely prospect. But one can hope. And some proposed realizations of quantum computing would benefit from small, extremely powerful magnets, while other proposed methods exploit the properties of superconductors directly (Josephson effect).

petesergeant 3y ago
> an inductor made out of a superconductor, that is looped back on itself, can hold a magnetic field indefinitely, with 0% loss. Energy storage. In a way that could be used to power a car?
- retrac 3y ago
  Conceivably, though the power density of superconducting energy storage is very low and will likely remain low. It is currently used at grid-scale to smooth out power spikes, since they can charge/discharge their full capacity almost instantly. > SMES is also used in utility applications. In northern Wisconsin, a string of distributed SMES units were deployed to enhance stability of a transmission loop. The transmission line is subject to large, sudden load changes due to the operation of a paper mill, with the potential for uncontrolled fluctuations and voltage collapse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ...
  - civilitty 3y ago
    > power density of superconducting energy storage is very low That's backwards: the power density is high, but the energy density is low.
- orwin 3y ago
  I'm afraid not, the magnetic field might be a bit too strong. But for local/grid storage, it's perfect. Also, infinite magnets, this might allow for less neodymium in renewable. And probably dozen new applications we don't think of yet. I said 3 years ago on this website that the only techno silver bullet I believed in against climate change was room-temperature superconductors, as this would help tremendously on - interconnections, - energy storage, - efficiency, And obviously help with plasma research, that would then help with both fusion and space catapult. I was disappointed way too much by tech news in the last 10 years, but if this is true, I'd be really happy.
  - tomatotomato37 3y ago
    > I'm afraid not, the magnetic field might be a bit too strong. I was always curious about that. The ability to hold extreme electrical currents means superconductors also produce extreme magnetic fields, which I presume will happily induce induction currents in whatever conductive material is nearby. If that material is non-superconductive, than it will start sapping the electromagnetic energy from said superconductor as the eddy currents get resisted, getting hot in the process. What I guess I'm saying is that I'm not sure how you're supposed to build a superconductive grid or motor without also turning everything around it into an induction stove when you turn it on.
    - retrac 3y ago
      > than it will start sapping the electromagnetic energy from said superconductor Electromagnetic induction involves the inductor, too. With a conventional electromagnet in a changing field, there is a current (an opposite current, in a sense) induced in the electromagnet's winding which is how the energy transfer occurs. The coil's apparent resistance increases as it moves through the field. But superconductors have no resistance :) Since a superconductor rejects induction from outside magnetic fields (Meissner effect) they do not inductively couple in the same way. Once energized and then looped, a superconducting magnet behaves more like a permanent magnet. With regard to use in power storage, strong magnets of any kind are rather inconvenient (even dangerous) around anything magnetic.
gameshot911 3y ago
> Similarly, an inductor made out of a superconductor, that is looped back on itself, can hold a magnetic field indefinitely, with 0% loss. Energy storage. Could this be used to make a bomb? If the new material really is as easy to manufacture as it seems, could homegrown terrorists easily create WMDs?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- civilitty 3y ago
  Yes they can be used to make a multistage electromagnetic pulse device but room temperature superconductors wouldn't really make it that much easier. Definitely not easy enough for a non-state actor to make one. The amount of current generated during the first stage of an EMP detonation is so high it ablates the coil away, which wouldn't happen with superconducting wires. However, it wouldn't protect it against the explosive used to generate the magnetic field, which is the biggest challenge.
rcpt 3y ago
Portable MRI is sort of possible now https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0811222106 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0811222106
zardo 3y ago
> A thin superconductor can carry an almost arbitrary amount of electricity with 0% loss. A picture is worth a thousand words here. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=superconductor+critical+surface&t=fpas&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=superconductor+critical+surface&t=... Superconductors operate within the bounds of their critical surface. The max current depends on the temperature and field density, it's never arbitrary.
jacknews 3y ago
My woo detector is blaring. superconductors can't carry arbitrary current. A lot yes, but dependent on the material, temperature, magnetic field, etc. And on the subject of the material, can it even be made into a wire? Is it stable? How much does it cost? So assuming it costs about the same as copper, what are the benefits? 0% loss, vs, maybe 10%? So the grid is 10% more efficient? I mean, that's definitely useful, but... Again for energy storage, what's the energy density? How much does it cost, if it's even possible to configure for that use? It sounds like you expect to power a car from an AA-sized cell - not happening IMHO. Microelectronics; Can you make IC's with this? What is the feature size? We now have 10^11 transistors on a chip, can this do that? How costly? Even if it can, what's the actual benefit? Just power-saving, or can this ramp up to terrahertz speeds? Again, IMHO, not happening, except maybe for a few specialized switching applications. Super-strong magnetic fields? Ultra-sensitive magnetic detectors - OK, these make sense. I mean ambient superconductors would be a major thing, useful across many fields, and perhaps creating entirely new capabilities, but let's not get carried away that suddenly climate change is fixed, fusion will happen tomorrow (It'll never happen economically, IMHO), we'll all be moving around on levitating chairs like Wall-E, powered by AAs, etc, etc.
- retrac 3y ago
  I phrased it poorly - from an engineering standpoint, the amount of power a superconducting power line can carry is effectively limitless for practical purposes, in relation to the amount of material required. But yes, of course -- as I did say, eventually enough current flows that the magnetism induced breaks down the superconducting effect. > what are the benefits? 0% loss, vs, maybe 10%? With current lines, yes, rarely over 10% in practice. But what might be built without that barrier? There are many tens of gigawatts of undeveloped hydroelectric power in northern Canada, but that power has to be brought over some 5000 kilometres to New York or Chicago or Toronto. That can't currently be done. The losses are too high. America's primary solar power generating regions in the future, likewise, appear to be far from the major cities. > Again for energy storage, what's the energy density? How much does it cost, if it's even possible to configure for that use? It sounds like you expect to power a car from an AA-sized cell - not happening IMHO. Yes, it's already used, real-world actual applications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ... The energy density is too low for anything like domestic use. It will probably be most useful at grid scale. The economics may not work out. > Again, IMHO, not happening, except maybe for a few specialized switching applications. Switching at just under 1 THz has been demonstrated recently. Anyway, I agree. I already said as much -- "a rather unlikely prospect". C'mon. I'm just excited about superconductors. They're cool! Except hopefully not anymore! I don't believe anything I said was factually wrong. Your primary gripe seems to be that I'm not sufficiently pessimistic about the likelihood of some of the possibilities. So -- room temperature superconductors are probably not real. And everything I spoke of must be understood as conjecture and hypothetical, with large and unknown variables, regarding things like the practical cost and material workability of the room temperature superconductors, which may not even be possible. Better?

by retrac 3y ago

petesergeant 3y ago

> an inductor made out of a superconductor, that is looped back on itself, can hold a magnetic field indefinitely, with 0% loss. Energy storage. In a way that could be used to power a car?

retrac 3y ago
Conceivably, though the power density of superconducting energy storage is very low and will likely remain low. It is currently used at grid-scale to smooth out power spikes, since they can charge/discharge their full capacity almost instantly. > SMES is also used in utility applications. In northern Wisconsin, a string of distributed SMES units were deployed to enhance stability of a transmission loop. The transmission line is subject to large, sudden load changes due to the operation of a paper mill, with the potential for uncontrolled fluctuations and voltage collapse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ...
- civilitty 3y ago
  > power density of superconducting energy storage is very low That's backwards: the power density is high, but the energy density is low.
orwin 3y ago
I'm afraid not, the magnetic field might be a bit too strong. But for local/grid storage, it's perfect. Also, infinite magnets, this might allow for less neodymium in renewable. And probably dozen new applications we don't think of yet. I said 3 years ago on this website that the only techno silver bullet I believed in against climate change was room-temperature superconductors, as this would help tremendously on - interconnections, - energy storage, - efficiency, And obviously help with plasma research, that would then help with both fusion and space catapult. I was disappointed way too much by tech news in the last 10 years, but if this is true, I'd be really happy.
- tomatotomato37 3y ago
  > I'm afraid not, the magnetic field might be a bit too strong. I was always curious about that. The ability to hold extreme electrical currents means superconductors also produce extreme magnetic fields, which I presume will happily induce induction currents in whatever conductive material is nearby. If that material is non-superconductive, than it will start sapping the electromagnetic energy from said superconductor as the eddy currents get resisted, getting hot in the process. What I guess I'm saying is that I'm not sure how you're supposed to build a superconductive grid or motor without also turning everything around it into an induction stove when you turn it on.
  - retrac 3y ago
    > than it will start sapping the electromagnetic energy from said superconductor Electromagnetic induction involves the inductor, too. With a conventional electromagnet in a changing field, there is a current (an opposite current, in a sense) induced in the electromagnet's winding which is how the energy transfer occurs. The coil's apparent resistance increases as it moves through the field. But superconductors have no resistance :) Since a superconductor rejects induction from outside magnetic fields (Meissner effect) they do not inductively couple in the same way. Once energized and then looped, a superconducting magnet behaves more like a permanent magnet. With regard to use in power storage, strong magnets of any kind are rather inconvenient (even dangerous) around anything magnetic.

gameshot911 3y ago

> Similarly, an inductor made out of a superconductor, that is looped back on itself, can hold a magnetic field indefinitely, with 0% loss. Energy storage. Could this be used to make a bomb? If the new material really is as easy to manufacture as it seems, could homegrown terrorists easily create WMDs?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
civilitty 3y ago
Yes they can be used to make a multistage electromagnetic pulse device but room temperature superconductors wouldn't really make it that much easier. Definitely not easy enough for a non-state actor to make one. The amount of current generated during the first stage of an EMP detonation is so high it ablates the coil away, which wouldn't happen with superconducting wires. However, it wouldn't protect it against the explosive used to generate the magnetic field, which is the biggest challenge.

rcpt 3y ago

Portable MRI is sort of possible now https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0811222106 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0811222106

zardo 3y ago

> A thin superconductor can carry an almost arbitrary amount of electricity with 0% loss. A picture is worth a thousand words here. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=superconductor+critical+surface&t=fpas&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=superconductor+critical+surface&t=... Superconductors operate within the bounds of their critical surface. The max current depends on the temperature and field density, it's never arbitrary.

jacknews 3y ago

My woo detector is blaring. superconductors can't carry arbitrary current. A lot yes, but dependent on the material, temperature, magnetic field, etc. And on the subject of the material, can it even be made into a wire? Is it stable? How much does it cost? So assuming it costs about the same as copper, what are the benefits? 0% loss, vs, maybe 10%? So the grid is 10% more efficient? I mean, that's definitely useful, but... Again for energy storage, what's the energy density? How much does it cost, if it's even possible to configure for that use? It sounds like you expect to power a car from an AA-sized cell - not happening IMHO. Microelectronics; Can you make IC's with this? What is the feature size? We now have 10^11 transistors on a chip, can this do that? How costly? Even if it can, what's the actual benefit? Just power-saving, or can this ramp up to terrahertz speeds? Again, IMHO, not happening, except maybe for a few specialized switching applications. Super-strong magnetic fields? Ultra-sensitive magnetic detectors - OK, these make sense. I mean ambient superconductors would be a major thing, useful across many fields, and perhaps creating entirely new capabilities, but let's not get carried away that suddenly climate change is fixed, fusion will happen tomorrow (It'll never happen economically, IMHO), we'll all be moving around on levitating chairs like Wall-E, powered by AAs, etc, etc.

retrac 3y ago
I phrased it poorly - from an engineering standpoint, the amount of power a superconducting power line can carry is effectively limitless for practical purposes, in relation to the amount of material required. But yes, of course -- as I did say, eventually enough current flows that the magnetism induced breaks down the superconducting effect. > what are the benefits? 0% loss, vs, maybe 10%? With current lines, yes, rarely over 10% in practice. But what might be built without that barrier? There are many tens of gigawatts of undeveloped hydroelectric power in northern Canada, but that power has to be brought over some 5000 kilometres to New York or Chicago or Toronto. That can't currently be done. The losses are too high. America's primary solar power generating regions in the future, likewise, appear to be far from the major cities. > Again for energy storage, what's the energy density? How much does it cost, if it's even possible to configure for that use? It sounds like you expect to power a car from an AA-sized cell - not happening IMHO. Yes, it's already used, real-world actual applications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energy_storage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnetic_energ... The energy density is too low for anything like domestic use. It will probably be most useful at grid scale. The economics may not work out. > Again, IMHO, not happening, except maybe for a few specialized switching applications. Switching at just under 1 THz has been demonstrated recently. Anyway, I agree. I already said as much -- "a rather unlikely prospect". C'mon. I'm just excited about superconductors. They're cool! Except hopefully not anymore! I don't believe anything I said was factually wrong. Your primary gripe seems to be that I'm not sufficiently pessimistic about the likelihood of some of the possibilities. So -- room temperature superconductors are probably not real. And everything I spoke of must be understood as conjecture and hypothetical, with large and unknown variables, regarding things like the practical cost and material workability of the room temperature superconductors, which may not even be possible. Better?